My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/06/2015
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2015
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 08/06/2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:23:31 AM
Creation date
12/16/2015 10:43:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
08/06/2015
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
353
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
June 25, 2015 I Volume 9 1 Issue 12 Zoning Bulletin <br />Enforcement of Regulations— <br />Property owner appeals notice of <br />town ordinance violation <br />Court addresses issue of whether notice of <br />violation is appealable <br />Citation: Paradis v. Town of Peru, 2015 ME 54, 2015 WL 2114385 (Me. <br />2015) <br />MAINE (05/07/15)—This case addressed the issue of whether a notice of <br />ordinance violation could be appealed. <br />The Background/Facts: In 2010, Donald R. Paradis ("Paradis") applied <br />for and obtained a building permit to construct a two -car garage on a parcel of <br />property in Peru, Maine (the "Town"). In August 2013, the Town sent Paradis <br />a notice of violation that the garage violated multiple town ordinance <br />provisions. <br />Paradis appealed to the Town's Board of Appeals (the "Board"). The Board <br />concluded that the town ordinance provisions had been properly applied. The <br />Board denied Paradis' appeal. <br />Paradis again appealed to superior court. The superior court affirmed the <br />Board's judgment. <br />Paradis again appealed. <br />DECISION: Judgment of superior court vacated, and matter <br />remanded. <br />The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine held that the notice of violation is- <br />sued to Paradis was not an appealable decision. As such, the court did not <br />reach the merits of the appeal. <br />The court noted that, under Maine law, "[u]ntil very recently, appeals of <br />notices of violation were not justiciable because a notice merely provided an <br />interpretation.of an ordinance; unless and until a municipality acted to enforce <br />the decision in some meaningful way, appeals from notices of violation were <br />`dismissed as calling for an advisory opinion.' " The court further noted that, <br />in 2013, however, the Maine Legislature enacted a statutory amendment <br />providing for board of appeals and Superior Court review of municipal notices <br />of violation. Thus, since October 2013, under 30-A M.R.S. § 2691(4), <br />"[absent an express provision in a charter or ordinance that certain decisions <br />of its code enforcement officer or board of appeals are only advisory or may <br />not be appealed, a notice of violation or an enforcement order by a code <br />enforcement officer under a land use ordinance is reviewable on appeal by the <br />board of appeals and in turn by the Superior Court under the Maine Rules of <br />Civil Procedure, Rule 80B." <br />Here, the notice of violation against Paradis was sent before the effective <br />date of § 2691(4). Moreover, the Town's Ordinance expressly stated that no <br />appeal from a notice of violation could be taken. (The Town's Ordinance did <br />10 © 2015 Thomson Reuters <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.